Money applies because it remains the mechanism for value exchange. People don’t trust things which are free. Nikolay is right in his observation that SU uses scarcity to sell abundance; again to me an example of “taking the gift”. It is an ancient sales technique. It is difficult to get brains/souls to think otherwise. Is SU accountable for changing the nature of perceived value before it acts?

To the extent that SU creates a globally connected set of open minded and resourced brains with wills to act, it creates a pool of value. By my read, SU uses the material in front of it to create connected brains fitting a future, post industrial, post capital era….it does so during the rapid decline of those eras….where is the fallacy? Where is the “no clothes” delusion and revelation?

Would i be wrong to use river stones and clay to build my home if steel and concrete were not abundant?

Is SU wrong to spread optimism and hope for a better world and also build wealth, in a world where wealth is still valued, while it also builds an amorphous self growing planetary network of unknown but assumed positive value?

Were i Google in 5-20 years, i would not need to buy SU. I would “take the gift” and let it pay to expand my influence. I’m not sure where the money is. Its more about connecting and acting.

I’m certain that real world logistics have tempered some early SU euphoria. I’m also certain that the founders have an eye on the long ball, executing SU as an ExO with intent.

I’m wondering where the failure is. I’m trying to name the presumed illusion.